Merge pull request #18 from snowclone-base/existing-solutions

added footer to image

casestudy/existing-solutions/index.html

@@ -273,7 +273,10 @@ <h2 id=comparison>
                           Supabase vs Firebase vs Snowclone <a href=#comparison class=anchor aria-hidden=true>#</a>
                         </h2>
                         <p>There are several BaaS options currently on the market. The most popular choices are Supabase and Google’s Firebase, the primary difference between these being their database types. Firebase makes use of a noSQL document database, while Supabase uses PostgreSQL. Teams with an evolving data model or a need for high scalability might prefer the flexibility and scaling capabilities of noSQL. In such cases, Firebase would likely be a good option for backend services. However, SQL’s ACID guarantees and querying capabilities ensure that it has remained the most prominent database type for web applications. The use of PostgreSQL makes Supabase a good option for teams that need relational databases and the benefits that are associated with them. Similarly, we designed Snowclone to use PostgreSQL due to the prominence of relational data models. </p>
-                        <img src="../../images/baas-comparison.png" alt="Comparison of Supabase, Firebase, and Snowclone">
+                        <figure>
+                            <img src="../../images/baas-comparison.png" alt="Comparison of Supabase, Firebase, and Snowclone">
+                            <figcaption>* Multiple backends managed in a central UI</figcaption>
+                        </figure>
                         <h2 id=open-source>
                           Open-Source <a href=#comparison class=anchor aria-hidden=true>#</a>
                         </h2>